Coolest gadgets from the CES show?
-
those are pretty cool. Though seeing thousands of them in the skys - that avoidance software Google is working on for self driving cars will be a must.
-
@Dashrender said:
those are pretty cool. Though seeing thousands of them in the skys - that avoidance software Google is working on for self driving cars will be a must.
Completely not good enough actually. as the Z axis is not handled yet.
-
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
Some day I envision lanes of traffic just like Star Wars or Back to the Future 2.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
Some day I envision lanes of traffic just like Star Wars or Back to the Future 2.
Right, there will still be "lanes" there is no way it will be allowed a free for all to fly wherever.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
Some day I envision lanes of traffic just like Star Wars or Back to the Future 2.
Right, there will still be "lanes" there is no way it will be allowed a free for all to fly wherever.
at least in cities.
I see no point in lanes in the country, just take the shortest route, like planes. -
@Dashrender said:
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
Some day I envision lanes of traffic just like Star Wars or Back to the Future 2.
Right, there will still be "lanes" there is no way it will be allowed a free for all to fly wherever.
at least in cities.
I see no point in lanes in the country, just take the shortest route, like planes.Planes don't take the shortest fastest route. They are in lanes.
-
This type of technology could kill the national aviation scene, don't you think? In a good way?
I'm guessing we'd still have normal planes for intercontinental flights (trans oceanic) or even really long flights, like east to west coast USA.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Although the z-axis makes this a lot easier. You can have much higher density than you can without it. Just how planes pass over top of each other.
No it does not make it easier. I complicates the calculations tremendously.
Yes, it provides more options for avoidance. But is also provides more options for collisions.
That all has to get calculated in real time.
True, but also less need for objects to travel so close to each other. More macro avoidance, less micro.
Some day I envision lanes of traffic just like Star Wars or Back to the Future 2.
Right, there will still be "lanes" there is no way it will be allowed a free for all to fly wherever.
The "fastest point" stuff is meant, from what i can tell, for "flying" below 500ft on your own property. Like around your own farm or on a golf course where it is private and planes can't go.
-
@Dashrender said:
This type of technology could kill the national aviation scene, don't you think? In a good way?
Trains didn't. Why would this? This is really only good for really short distances.
-
But the great thing is that it covers places that are close but roads can't handle. Like if a bridge is out or a ravine or rough terrain.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
This type of technology could kill the national aviation scene, don't you think? In a good way?
Trains didn't. Why would this? This is really only good for really short distances.
Because this gets rid of the schedule.
If you can hope into your private drone and just set it for Denver (a normal destination for me 8 hrs by car) This would be awesome! Even if the drone needed 2 recharging stops along the way, if the time was reduced by 50%, Why take a plane?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
But the great thing is that it covers places that are close but roads can't handle. Like if a bridge is out or a ravine or rough terrain.
Range is only 38km though. 23 minute hover time at 100km/h.
-
Of course i'm not thinking of these things with today's tech, I'm thinking of them with tomorrows, where they can move 600 miles on a charge, hell 200 miles on a charge with a recharge time of 15 mins or less.
-
The rated weight is 100kg. I currently weigh 98.6kg. does not leave any spare room for my toolkit and PC bag.
Guess I need to lose more weight.
-
Would you stop crapping on this toy
-
@Dashrender There are already mods out there for normal drones to run on alternate power, so I can see the range increasing pretty simply.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
This type of technology could kill the national aviation scene, don't you think? In a good way?
Trains didn't. Why would this? This is really only good for really short distances.
Because this gets rid of the schedule.
If you can hope into your private drone and just set it for Denver (a normal destination for me 8 hrs by car) This would be awesome! Even if the drone needed 2 recharging stops along the way, if the time was reduced by 50%, Why take a plane?
They already have small planes. Other than the licensing thing.....
